Regulators truncated [NCA / SHAM]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2009-06-18 11:26 (6204 d 03:19 ago) – Posting: # 3872
Views: 40,332

Dear Ohlbe, dear Jaime, dear all,

let me share some experience with regulators in the EMEA. In a recent submission of a BE study with a long half-life product (t1/2 from literature about 50-70 h) we submitted an evaluation with AUC(0-72h), Cmax and tmax as metrics, the typical truncated area setting.

Regulators response:
The Germans asked for AUC(0-inf)!
The French asked for lamdaZ (kel) and t1/2!


Hopefully they will not ask for residual area <20% :angry: .

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,653 posts in 4,991 threads, 1,570 registered users;
111 visitors (0 registered, 111 guests [including 21 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:46 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5